On 05/09/2012 12:42 PM, David Carlisle wrote:
The world is still just as safe a place to live in with this luatex
bug in it. And actually, it helps if these bugs are reported in the
tracker ;)
Well yes although it isn't really a bug (in that it was presumably
implemented as designed) rather than (I claim) a questionable design
decision when you take legacy code into account. Which is why I raised
it on this discussion list rather than as a bug.
Well, in luatex tries to be 100% compatible with XeTeX (where
applicable) and in this case it clearly wasn't, so that qualifies
as a bug. As was the missing \Umathcharnumdef that I added this
morning btw.
Given that bm has been completely stable for 20 years, it's not that big
a deal to have to update it for the unicode age, but it would be good
(for bm, and for every other math package author) if that only needs to
be done once. My main concern was that was not the case. But actually if
I understand the replies correctly I should be able to share the code
for xelatex and lualatex so long as I avoid \mathcode once I have
detected either of them?
I think so, but I have no knowledge of the internals of bm.
Best wishes,
Taco
